Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from D. Smith.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2006 will be available at the meeting.

J. Sawday requested that his apologies be recorded.

K. Chhapi stated that under Minute 21, “Minutes of Previous Meting,” his comment was made prior to the meeting.

It was pointed out that under Minute 24, “Current Development Proposals,” item J) 62A London Road, concerned three telecommunication antennae, rather than new rear windows.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the Panel held on 26 July 2006 be confirmed as a correct record subject to the above amendments.

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

The Service Director, Planning and Policy submits a report on decisions made by the Planning and Development Control Committee on planning applications previously considered by the Panel.

The Panel wished it to be noted that they had extreme concern regarding the approval for the demolition of 142 Charles Street, 2 Church Street (Spread Eagle Public House.) It was observed that approval had been granted despite objections from the Panel, Conservation Officers and English Heritage, and despite previous enforcement action being approved. The Panel stated that they felt there was insufficient justification given for the decision. The Panel was also concerned that the decision may have not satisfied PPG15.

The Service Director, Planning and Policy submits a report on planning applications received for consideration by the Panel.

A) WELLINGTON HOTEL, RUTLAND STREET

Planning Application 20061314

Retention of windows and rooflights

The Director reported that windows were replaced with uPVC contrary to the approved scheme and the application was for the retention of these windows.

The Panel objected to the retention of the uPVC units on the following grounds: outwards method of opening, inappropriate dimensions of glazing bars, the loss of curved glass feature, infill of arches, materials used, increase in reflection and the loss of sashes which added animation to the elevation. Enforcement action was supported.

B) CHARLES STREET POLICE STATION

Advertisement Consent 20061269

Three fascia signs

The Director said that the application was for signage to advertise new office space in the development.

The Panel felt that 3 years was too long and that consent should only be given for 2 years. They also queried the method of attaching the signs.  They therefore requested amendment of the application.

C)TOWN HALL, TOWN HALL SQUARE

Listed Building Consent 20061325

Internal alterations and new substation

The Director stated that the internal alterations were required to make use of the second floor and allow for easier disabled access.

The Panel requested a site visit to assess the works properly. 

D) ENGINEERING BUILDING, LEICESTER UNIVERSITY

Listed Building Consent 20061189

Internal Alterations

The Director reported that alterations were requested for the 3^rd, 4^th and 6^th floors of the building. The alterations would increase energy efficiency and allow for more flexible use of space.

The Panel thought that the creation of a false ceiling to the 6th floor was acceptable but queried the need to remove all the benches and suggested that some could be retained, reused or worked around. They opposed the loss of the wall to the 4^th floor but were supportive of the changes to the louvres provided that the detailing was good. They also queried whether the boxing in of the pipework was necessary for health and safety reasons. They therefore requested amendment of the application.

E) 7^TH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH, LONDON ROAD

Listed Building Consent 20060754

Retention of internal alterations

The Director reported that unauthorised work had been carried out to the basement of the building, but it was difficult to ascertain what alterations had been done as there was no record of the interior of the basement prior to this.

The Panel gave reluctant approval of the works due to the lack of evidence of what was removed, but asked that a warning be issued to the applicant to prevent any further unauthorised works in the future.

F)2 SAXBY STREET

Planning Permission 20061033

Demolition and redevelopment

The Director reported that the proposal was for demolition of the garage and redevelopment with four storey block of flats. This was a revised scheme, following a previous refusal.

The Panel felt that the current scheme was an improvement on the previous submission, but asked that special attention be given to the selection of materials and detailing.

G) LEESON BUILDING, CANNING PLACE

Planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

The meeting closed at 7.25pm.